The Awareness Center closed. We operated from April 30, 1999 - April 30, 2014. This site is being provided for educational & historical purposes.
We were the international Jewish Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault (JCASA); and were dedicated to ending sexual violence in Jewish communities globally. We did our best to operate as the make a wish foundation for Jewish survivors of sex crimes. In the past we offered a clearinghouse of information, resources, support and advocacy.

Burnt Out - A failure in a device attributable termination to burning, excessive heat, or friction. Physical or emotional
exhaustion, especially as a result of long-term stress. One who is burnt out, as from long-term stress.

Vicarious -

Endured or done by one person substituting for another.

Acting in place of someone or something else.

Felt or undergone as if one were taking part in the experience or feelings of another.

Occurring in or performed by a part of the body not normally associated with a certain function(s).

Victimization - To subject to swindle or fraud. To make a victim of.

Compassion - The deep feelings of sharing the suffering of another, together with the inclinations to give aid or
support or to show mercy.

Fatigue - Physical or mental weariness resulting from exertion. 2. Tiring of effort or activity; labor. 3. The decrease
capacity or complete inability of an organism, origin, or part to function normally because of an excessive stimulation or
prolonged exertion. 4. Weakness in material, such as metal or wood, resulting from prolonged stress. To tire-out; exhaust.

Solution:

Fun - A source of enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure. Playful and often noisy activity. To behave playfully; joke.

Humor- The quality of being amusing or comicical. The ability to perceive, enjoy, or express what is comical or funny.

Sunday, December 01, 1996

American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC) - December, 1996

APSAC published this Fact Sheet on Ritual Abuse as a service to members and the general public in December, 1996.

"Ritual abuse" is one of the most-talked-about, rarest, and least-understood forms of alleged child maltreatment. Experts disagree about whether or not "ritual abuse" exists, the range of situations to include in the category, and the extent and significance of these situations. Some argue that the term "ritual abuse" should be abandoned because it confuses more than it clarifies. Many more questions than answers exist about this highly controversial topic.

WHAT IS "RITUAL ABUSE"?Most allegations of what comes to be called "ritual abuse" involve one or more of the following elements: terrorizing acts (e.g., threats to kill parents, pets, or loved ones if the abuse is disclosed); acts involving supernatural symbolism or ritual (e.g., the use of masks or robes, the use of crosses or pentagrams); acts involving real or simulated killing of animals and sometimes human infants (these acts can serve both ritual and terrorizing ends); acts involving real or simulated ingestion of urine, feces, blood, and "magic potions" which might include mind-altering substances; severe sexual abuse, often including penetration with objects.

Experts have proposed that allegations often classified as "ritual abuse" might reflect three very different situations (Finkelhor & Williams, 1988):

Cult-based ritual abuse. The hallmark of this type of abuse is an elaborated spiritual belief system not sanctioned by any of the major organized religions. Abuse of children is probably not the ultimate goal, but the vehicle for inducing in adults a quasi-religious state and for creating and maintaining a particular spiritual or social system. The belief system may or may not be "satanic."

Pseudo-ritualistic abuse. The primary goal is the abuse of children. Masks, costumes, visits to graveyards, threats of harm to the children and their families, and the killing of animals may be ways to intimidated children into participating, to prohibit their disclosure of the abuse, and to discredit their accounts if they do tell.

Psychopathological ritualism. Ritualistic acts are part of the obsessive or delusional system of a mentally disturbed individual, rather than the reflection of a developed ideology or of opportunism.

Such allegations might also be false, the result of fantasy or delusion on the part of the alleged victim (sometimes fed by books or television), or of misinterpretation or suggestion by interveners, including parents, police officers, therapists, and others.

WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR "RITUAL ABUSE"?Supervisory Special Agent Kenneth Lanning, MS, of the FBI, with extensive experience consulting on multi-victim, multi-perpetrator child sexual abuse cases, concluded that there is no evidence for a widespread satanic conspiracy perpetrating cult-based ritual abuse (Lanning, 1992). Other reputable nationwide studies support this conclusion (Bottoms, Shaver, & Goodman, in press).

Because professionals disagree about what constitutes "ritual abuse," and no mechanisms are in place at the local, state, or national levels to track reports of ritual abuse or to investigate the validity of ritual elements, no reliable data are available about its prevalence. A recent nationwide study has concluded that many allegations of abuse now referred to as "ritualistic" have nothing to do with supernatural beliefs, Satanists, or organized cults (Bottoms, Shaver, & Goodman, in press).

In one national research study of sexual abuse in day care (Finkelhor & Williams, 1988), one or more ritual elements were alleged in 13% of cases. The researchers could not determine whether these allegations were true or false, or whether they might pertain to cult-based ritual abuse, pseudo-ritualistic abuse, or psychopathological ritualism.

Much more evidence exists for religion-related abuse (i.e., abuse driven by beliefs associated with non-satanic religions or perpetrated by someone with religious authority) than for "ritual abuse" (Bottoms, Shaver, Goodman, & Qin, in press). Religion-related abuse includes such acts as "beating the devil out of a child," abusive "exorcism" and "deliverance" ceremonies, sexual abuse by clergy, and religiously motivated medical neglect.

WHO IS ALLEGED TO PERPETRATE "RITUAL ABUSE"?Sexual abuse in which ritual elements are alleged is typically perpetrated by two or more people acting in concert. Whereas most surveys indicate that males are responsible for more than 95 percent of sexual abuse perpetrated against individual children, females comprise 40 percent to 55 percent of alleged perpetrators acting in concert (Finkelhor & Williams, 1988; Faller, 1994).

WHAT DO CHILD ABUSE PROFESSIONALS BELIEVE ABOUT RITUAL ABUSE?Professionals are divided over whether or not "ritual abuse" occurs. Much of the controversy in the professional community would likely disappear with the introduction of a coherent, widely-accepted definition of "ritual abuse."

No reliable data are available on the prevalence of different beliefs about "ritual abuse" among professionals. However, in a nationwide study of thousands of interdisciplinary professionals, 11 percent of mental health professionals reported having encountered one or more allegations of child abuse that included ritual elements, as defined by the researchers. A very small group of clinicians (1.4 percent), each claiming to have treated scores of cases, accounted for most of the reports of ritualistic child abuse (Bottoms, Shaver, & Goodman, in press).

A very high percentage of professionals who encountered reports of ritual abuse from patients believed those reports, based largely on patients' strong affect and apparently abuse-related behavioral symptoms, even though other corroborative evidence was often lacking (Bottoms, Shaver, & Goodman, in press).

WHAT IS THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM RESPONSE TO ALLEGED "RITUAL ABUSE"?Some studies have found that allegations of sexual abuse involving ritual elements are prosecuted at a lower rate than allegations without such elements (Finkelhor & Williams, 1988). Others have found no significant difference in the rate at which these allegations are prosecuted (Faller, 1994). Ritualistic elements that lack corroboration can discredit otherwise verifiable accounts of abuse, and are often downplayed by prosecutors (Faller, 1994)

True accounts of abuse can include false elements that reflect fantasy on the part of victims, misinterpretation or suggestion by interveners, or deception by perpetrators. One of the most difficult challenges for child abuse professionals today is establishing criteria for distinguishing between true and false elements in accounts of abuse.

SOURCES

Bottoms, B.L., Shaver, P.R., Goodman, G.S., and Qin, J. (in press). In the name of God: A profile of religion-related child abuse. Journal of Social Issues.

Thursday, November 14, 1996

The following film clips (Part 1 and 2) arefrom a Nightline episode which aired on November 14, 1996.

This particular newscast was about the backlash against survivors of child sexual abuse coming forward and speaking out.

A group of people who claimed their children falsely accused them of incest banned together creating the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF). What this group basically did was take research out of context to prove that therapist were implanting false memories into their clients that their parents molested them. The reason for the backlash, was the fact that adult survivors of child sexual abuse started to file civil suits against their offenders -- who often were their parents.

Due to the number of frivolous law suits filed, many therapists quit working with anyone who disclosed child sexual abuse histories. This all changed in 2002, when the cases of clergy sexual abuse broke in Boston and also cases within Jewish communities, boy scouts and from within every religion.Below is the historic exposé, in which Nightline, with Ted Koppel, exposed the False Memory people for what they really were and an article that appeared in the New York Times regarding this show.

WHEN CHILDREN ACCUSE: WHO TO BELIEVE Child sex abuse is a very serious problem.

In 1994 alone 140,000 new cases were investigated and found to be real. But are innocent people being sentenced for crimes they never committed because of the testimony of the young?

Doubt over the testimony of children in sexual abuse cases has made it harder to try accused child molesters, sometimes with deadly consequences, but authorities say children do tell the truth in most cases.

TED KOPPEL: [voice-over] This week, another tragedy.

1st RESPONDENT: I don't understand this. They- they knew. Why did they let him come into this neighborhood? Or in any other neighborhood?

TED KOPPEL: [voice-over] A convicted child molester avoids prison because there is doubt over the testimony of a child.

STEPHEN CECI, Psychologist, Cornell University: We're never going to have - never going to have - a Pinocchio test. There will never be a test where the child's nose is growing longer when she gets it wrong.

TED KOPPEL: [voice-over] But when the convicted molester is sent home, he kills two children.

2nd RESPONDENT: When they do something like that, don't let them out. Just don't let them out at all.

TED KOPPEL: [voice-over] Tonight, the country faces a growing dilemma, knowing when to believe a child's word.

TED KOPPEL: This is a subject that is so controversial, about which people on both sides of the issue feel so passionately, that you should know how, in this particular instance, it was brought to our attention. Cydnea Tamarkin [sp?] has been a journalist for many years. She has devoted a great deal of attention to the subject of the sexual abuse of children by adults. Ms. Tamarkin has come to believe that, in recent years, a great many children who claim to have been sexually abused are not believed, or at least that suspects are not prosecuted because of some high-profile cases in which the testimony of children was found in court to be not credible. At one point, Ms. Tamarkin served on the advisory board of an organization called Believe the Children. She insists, however, that she remains neutral on the subject, and we have found her to be a useful, objective and reliable resource.@PGPH I'm telling you all of this because some people are under the impression, and have communicated this to us, that Ms. Tamarkin produced the reports you are about to see. That is not true. Correspondent Erin Hayes and producer Jim Hill have been especially sensitive to the suggestion that their work might be seen as anything less than objective reporting, and so have we. We are satisfied that their story is important and that Erin's report has been compiled as fairly and cleanly as possible.

ERIN HAYES, ABC News: [voice-over] Robert Jambois, a Kenosha, Wisconsin prosecutor, and his staff are preparing a case against a man accused of sexually molesting a little boy.

ROBERT JAMBOIS, Prosecutor, Kenosha, WI: He's been waking up in the middle of the night, you know, screaming, "Daddy, don't do it again."

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] As in most child sex abuse cases, there is no physical evidence.

ROBERT JAMBOIS: Basically, it's the child's word against the word of the adult.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] The case will hinge on the testimony of the boy. It will not be easy.

ROBERT JAMBOIS: He's going to be called a liar, and he's going to be told that, you know, going to say that he just- he made this whole thing up, or that somebody else made it all up.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Jambois says it will be doubly difficult because many potential jurors walk into court already dubious about the testimony of children.

ROBERT JAMBOIS: One of the questions that we often ask jurors, I mean, "Are you prepared to convict this defendant just based on the testimony- or based exclusively on the testimony of an eyewitness?" And many of them will say, "Yeah, yeah." And, "Well, what about- what if this eyewitness is five years old, and you believe this five-year-old, and you don't believe the defendant, are you still prepared to convict, based exclusively on the testimony of this five-year-old eyewitness?" "Oh, no," they're not really inclined to do that.

ERIN HAYES: And prosecutors from more than a dozen major cities told Nightline it is a disturbing trend. In the past five years, they say, it has become much more difficult to prosecute child sex abuse because the credibility of children's testimony has come under attack.

J. TOM MORGAN, Prosecutor, Dekalb County, Georgia: The courtroom has gotten very mean. It's gotten mean for children, and it's gotten mean for the people who advocate for children.

ROBERT JAMBOIS: If I have a credible child who's able to give a credible account of what occurred, why shouldn't that be enough? Why- why shouldn't the jury believe that a child will- is telling the truth about these matters?

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Because, a group of critics argues, in many cases, by the time children get to the witness stand, there has been too much opportunity for investigators to pressure children into describing abuse where there may be none. Attorney Steven Komen [sp?] has defended dozens of people charged with child sex abuse.

STEVEN KOMEN: My experience is, is that a qualified lawyer, or a psychiatrist, social worker, or psychologist, can get a child to say just about anything they want while they're talking to them.

RICHARD GARDNER, Psychiatrist: It has all the- all the criteria of a witchhunt, and the- the similarities between Salem and what we have now are uncanny.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] There is a history behind those charges, a spate of high-profile sex-abuse cases gone awry.

1st TV CORRESPONDENT: The community of Jordan, Minnesota has been jolted by allegations of a ring of child sexual abusers.

2nd TV CORRESPONDENT: Coerced into staying silent by the brandishing of guns and the mutilating of animals.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] But police and prosecutors had little, if any, experience with these unusual cases. Some took children's stories at face value or, worse, relentlessly interviewed some children until they finally came forward with stories of abuse.

ATTORNEY [?]: The children were never allowed to say, in their own words, what happened to them.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] In the years since, many of those cases have unraveled. Many of those accused had charges against them dropped, were acquitted, or had their convictions overturned.

PAUL STERN, Deputy Prosecutor, Kenosha, WI: Clearly, in the last two years there have been mistakes made in prosecution. There has been overcharging, there has been overreaching, there's been overzealous statements made by- by prosecutors, by investigators, by therapists.

ERIN HAYES: Those mistakes, prosecutors say, prompted them to change the system. Safeguards are being put in place, and interviewers are being trained not to lead children on in questioning.

PAUL STERN: This system works. This system works more effectively and more efficiently, with better results and better decisionmaking now than it did 10 years ago.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] But prosecutors say convincing juries of that has been extraordinarily difficult in the face of a counterattack they say is planting widespread doubt about the believability of children's testimony.@PGPH [on camera] And prosecutors say that counterattack is succeeding on the basis of unproven theories and misapplied science that they say should have no place in the courtroom.

IP[Commercial break]

TED KOPPEL: At the heart of many cases involving the sexual abuse of children is a debate over science in the courtroom. Erin Hayes continues her report.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] This is what is at the center of the debate, the statements of children, like this one, who told prosecutor Jambois that her father sexually molested her.

1st CHILD: He took a pen and stuck it in her- in my body.

INTERVIEWER: He did?

1st CHILD: Yeah.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] If you are a juror, listening to this child, should you have strong doubts? Is there reason to believe a child would make up something like that, or could be led to make it up? Many who defend the accused point to a body of research they say shows children can and do make up stories of sexual abuse. Some of they research they cite most frequently is that of Cornell University psychologist Stephen Ceci. Professor Ceci's staff has found they can elicit elaborate stories from young children, stories that are absolutely untrue, like this one.

2nd CHILD: The monkey escaped from the zoo. A man [unintelligible] he asked if- if I could help him find it, and I- and I found it.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] The studies have been widely cited in the media as evidence for questioning children's accounts of sex abuse. USA Today suggested questions can induce kids to falsely claim abuse. The Boston Herald said interviewers' techniques can often convince non-abused children they were truly molested, and more of Ceci's work has been cited in the courtroom as evidence of "...a high degree of suggestibility among young children...," that it's "...quite easy to distort a child's memory..." and "A child who was not abused may come to believe they were...@PGPH But Ceci says in many cases his work has been misused and misunderstood.

STEPHEN CECI, Psychologist, Cornell University: Not only do I believe children can be reliable in sexual abuse cases, I believe the vast majority of them are reliable in those cases.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] But Ceci says what is missing from many accounts of his work is that it is fairly difficult to convince children to make up even the most harmless stories.

STEPHEN CECI: Because in our studies we work at it very hard.

INTERVIEWER: And guess what, they found the monkey and gave it back to the lady. Did anything like that ever happen to you?

3rd CHILD: No.

INTERVIEWER: Did you ever help a stranger in a park to find a monkey that ran away from a zoo? You didn't?

STEPHEN CECI: We pursued kids repeatedly over long periods of time.

INTERVIEWER: Did anything like that ever happen to you?

4th CHILD: No.

STEPHEN CECI: I'm not talking about a single interview, where you sit down and you use a single leading question, and all of a sudden the child's giving you some highly elaborate narrative about something that never happened. That isn't how we grow a narrative. We do it over long periods of time, with repeated false suggestions by an interviewer.

ERIN HAYES: In fact, in his studies, most of the children ultimately do not give in to interviewers' suggestions, and while many of the interviews are about more serious subjects, medical exams, for example, they are not about sex abuse, and many in the child protection field are troubled that Ceci's research is being applied to sex abuse cases.

CHARLES WILSON, National Children's Advocacy Center: Because a child can be convinced of some event within their- within their realm of experience, such as seeing a clumsy clown at a- at a party, doesn't translate into that they can be made to believe that their grandfather had sex with them every Friday night for the last three years. It doesn't tell them about what the taste of semen is like. It doesn't tell them about the pain.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Professor Ceci says he sees his research as a first step toward understanding cases where children have made false allegations of abuse.

STEPHEN CECI: It in no way denies the true instance of child sexual abuse, to say that some percentage of those claims may be falsehoods because of the way the adults have pursued the kids' memories.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] But prosecutors say that is not the message being heard. Many jurors walk into court, they say, already doubting children, especially young children. [on camera] In fact, prosecutors in several states told Nightline that in many cases of sex abuse involving children under the age of six, they are not prosecuting, even when they are sure the child would be a credible witness. [voice-over] Rob Parrish, an assistant attorney general in Utah, is concerned that the cases are proving too tough for many prosecutors.

ROB PARRISH, Utah Assistant Attorney General: What I often say to prosecutors is that when we go in to a case like this, we have an extra burden. It's not just proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt. We've got to prove it pretty much beyond any doubt.

TED KOPPEL: In a moment, two of the men who have raised doubts about the reliability of children's testimony, when Erin Hayes's report continues.

[Commercial break]

RALPH UNDERWAGER, Psychologist: [videotape] The best thing to do, the thing that would, in fact, protect the largest number of children from being harmed is to do away with all this bullshit of child protection.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Ralph Underwager, a Minnesota psychologist-

Dr. RICHARD GARDNER: [videotape] And we are witnessing the greatest wave of hysteria in the history of the country.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] -and Dr. Richard Gardner, a New Jersey psychiatrist, are two of the most outspoken critics of child sex abuse investigators in this country. On a past Nightline, Dr. Gardner criticized what he called "the child abuse establishment."

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Gardner's and Underwager's research and theories raising doubts about the validity of many children's accusations of sex abuse have been widely cited in the media, and both have been highly sought, highly paid witnesses for people defending themselves against child sex abuse charges.

RALPH UNDERWAGER: I believe the great majority of the questioning of children that is done in this country is highly coercive, highly suggestive, leading, and produces inaccurate information.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Underwager has done research that he says backs him up. He evaluated taped interviews of children, children who claimed they were sexually abused. Too many of the interviewers, Underwager concluded, used leading or repeated questions, which he says cast serious doubts on the children's accusations.

RALPH UNDERWAGER: It is the case that repeated questioning is the most powerful and the- the most effective way to produce a false accusation.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] But his critics point out Underwager uses his own standards for determining what is repeated and leading. For instance, he has said that interviewers' questions like this one, "Okay ... I don't want you to say anything you can't remember for sure," could be considered leading. And most of the tapes he reviews come to him from defense attorneys, for whom he consults. When he testifies for them, he says, he is paid $2,500 a day. Underwager admits he has no way to known if the children's accounts of abuse in the cases he reviews are actually false.@PGPH [interviewing] How do you know, in each of these cases, that the abuse did not happen?

RALPH UNDERWAGER: I don't. That's not my function. That's the function of the justice system.

ROB PARRISH: If that's the case, then there's no reason for him to be expressing an opinion in the justice system, any more than any of the rest of us. I mean, you could call anybody in that circumstance to say, "I've viewed the tape and I think it's a bad interview, so therefore I think this child's probably not telling the truth."

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] At least 10 courts have disallowed Underwager's testimony. One ruled he "...did not have bone fide qualifications..." as a researcher. Another said his work "...was not scientifically reliable..."@PGPH Underwager does continue to testify, which concerns many of his critics, who say is expertise is colored by what they see as a sympathetic view toward pedophiles. In a Dutch publication [Paidika] three years ago, Underwager said, "Paedophiles need to become more positive and make the claim that paedophilia is an acceptable expression of God's will for love and will among human beings."@PGPH Underwager says he has always believed sex between adults and children is harmful, but says to help treat pedophiles, they must first be encouraged to openly proclaim their sexuality.

RALPH UNDERWAGER: That's what they need to do for themselves, and that's what we need to have them do, so that we can deal with it.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] In the same controversial article, he said "Male sex may make women jealous," and that can "...hold true for pedophile sex too."@PGPH [interviewing] To say that a woman would be jealous of pedophile sex, what do you mean by that? Why would you say something like that?"

RALPH UNDERWAGER: What's so difficult to understand about that?

ERIN HAYES: It's almost impossible for me to understand.

RALPH UNDERWAGER: In what way?

ERIN HAYES: Why would a woman, in your estimation, be jealous of sex between a pedophile and a child?

RALPH UNDERWAGER: If it interfered with whatever the woman had as her purposes, or her intents, or whatever her relationships were, that's what could occur.

MARK ELLIS, National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse: His methods and theories are not accepted by others in his field, and have been subject to a great deal of criticism by others in his field.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Prosecutors are also critical of Dr. Gardner, who not only testifies, but publishes and markets his own books on child sex abuse, books often quoted in court cases.

ATTORNEY: [law firm videotape] Now, I want to talk to you about the most common cause of false accusations.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] In this videotape produced by a law firm, an attorney cites from Dr. Gardner's research Gardner's conclusion that false allegations of child sex abuse are commonplace in custody disputes.

ATTORNEY: [law firm videotape] This phenomena [sic] has been examined in research and it's now been given the name "parental alienation syndrome."

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] That disorder, however, cannot be found in the standard manual of psychiatric diagnoses. It is a term Dr. Gardner coined himself, based mainly on his own experience as a psychiatrist.@PGPH But the largest study done on the subject to date found that false allegations of child sexual abuse rarely surface in custody disputes ["...less than 2% of cases involved an allegation of sexual abuse." Dr. Gardner declined a videotaped interview for this report, but he sells tapes of his own, as well, in which he describes his criteria to help determine whether a child's allegation of sexual abuse is true or false. Among his criteria?

Dr. RICHARD GARDNER: [videotape] If it sounds incredible, it's probably not true.@PGPH In extreme cases, children who are sexually abused become like little street-smart sluts. I believe that children who are false accusers are going to have a higher incidence of reading mystery stories.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] Dr. Gardner concedes no one has scientifically tested his criteria, not even he.

ROB PARRISH: Those tests are not based on scientific reality. They're not verified, they're not validated in any way.

ERIN HAYES: [voice-over] But, prosecutors say, such work is having a real effect in the courtroom.

ROBERT JAMBOIS: It has promoted a level of cynicism among a significant percentage of the population, and when you're dealing in an area where you have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously among the jury, a little bit of cynicism can do a great deal of damage.

IPTED KOPPEL: Balancing the rights of the accused and the abused- some final thoughts from correspondent Erin Hayes, in a moment.

[Commercial break]

TED KOPPEL: Joining us now from our Chicago bureau, ABC's Erin Hayes.@PGPH Erin, I get the sense that- that there really has been no conclusion to this story. I mean, your report ends, but it doesn't end with a conclusion. I take it that's because there isn't any.

ERIN HAYES: There really is no conclusion. There's a consensus among those I've spoken to, and that is that the pendulum just needs to swing back to the middle, that there was in the 1980s a tendency to immediately believe children's accounts of sex abuse, now there's a tendency to doubt children right away, and neither, they say, is reasonable.

TED KOPPEL: And what do the experts say can be done to bring about that happy medium?

ERIN HAYES: Well, they're trying now to remove reasons for doubt, to build more credible cases. There's a great deal of training going on now of police and prosecutors, therapists, even judges, about the best way to interview children to get the most accurate information from them. But having said that, they also say there will never be a crystal ball, an easy test, a simple way to know if an account of abuse is true or false. Each case, they say, has to be determined the old-fashioned way, on its merits, examining all the facts.

TED KOPPEL: Unfortunately, we're talking about fear on both sides, fear, on the one hand, of not believing children who deserve to be believed, fear, on the other hand, of convicting innocent people because of an easily suggestible child.

ERIN HAYES: Well, those I've spoken to say there are two things to remember. The first is that you have to remember that the accused is innocent and has to be presumed innocent until they're proven guilty. But they also say it's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not, prosecutors say, beyond an irrational doubt. And what they're asking jurors to do is to walk into court with an open mind and a willingness to listen.

TED KOPPEL: And on that note, Erin Hayes, let me thank you. I appreciate it very much.@PGPH That's our report for tonight. Tomorrow, on Good Morning America, Sarah Ferguson, and Evander Holyfield. Then, on the Nightline Friday Night Special, an unprecedented town meeting in the Watts section of Los Angeles with the director of Central Intelligence. He'll be answering questions about the lingering controversy over the CIA's alleged role in the crack cocaine epidemic during the 1980s.@PGPH I'm Ted Koppel in Washington. For all of us here at ABC News, good night.

The preceding text has been professionally transcribed. However, although the text has been checked against an audio track, in order to meet rigid distribution and transmission deadlines, it may not have been proofread against tape.

Three Oklahoma inmates are waging a battle over prison cuisine with federal lawsuits demanding corrections officials pay for them to eat kosher. Kosher diet

Box Insert: There are 613 basic laws of Orthodox Judaism, and 60 to 70 of those pertain to eating kosher. Jews following strict interpretation of kosher laws cannot eat pork or mix meat and dairy, including cooking the items in the same pot, pan or stove, or with the same utensils; and beef must be properly slaughtered and drained of all blood.

Source: Rabbi Ovadia Goldman of Oklahoma City

The inmates, all convicted sex offenders, claim the state Corrections Department is violating the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment by not allowing them to practice their chosen religion, Orthodox Judaism.

Lawyers representing prison officials responded that serving the kosher meals would cost millions of dollars, might violate the First Amendment's establishment-of-religion clause and could even cause riots.

Similar arguments failed two years ago when Colorado lost a court case with prisoners demanding free kosher meals.

The arguments in the Oklahoma case unfolded this week in an Oklahoma City federal courtroom with testimony from the Jewish inmates, a rabbi and a top state prison official.

The inmates said they are forced to pay for kosher meals without any real assurance the food is, indeed, kosher. In most instances, the men said they are forced to eat just fruits and vegetables.

The inmates' attorney, Rand Eddy, called Rabbi Ovadia Goldman of the Chabad Jewish Center of Oklahoma City to testify about the importance of eating kosher to those practicing Orthodox Judaism.

"Every law that God gave us is an opportunity and a chance to strengthen our relationship with him," Goldman said. "If there's a possibility to eat kosher food, then not eating kosher food weakens our relationship with God."

Goldman said that in a restrictive setting, the best way to ensure meals are properly prepared is to serve pre-packaged kosher meals.

Bobby Boone, deputy director of the Corrections Department's eastern region, said to provide such meals would cost Oklahoma's prison system about $3.8 million extra a year.

Once kosher meals are served, then other religions will demand other special diets, Boone said under questioning from Oklahoma Assistant Attorney General Stefan Doughty.

Of the 96 religions represented in the state's prison population, 20 could make a claim to having a special dietary need, Boone estimated, saying about 6 percent of the prison population could make such a claim.

The prison system now spends about $2.50 a day for each inmate to eat. Kosher meals would cost about $10 a day, Boone said.

To provide kosher meals, the Corrections Department would have to cut staff, Boone said.

"We're not operating at full staff anywhere in the state of Oklahoma," Boone said. "It would increase the risk" inside and outside the prison.

Inside the prison, Boone said, providing kosher meals for Jews could upset other groups that see it as preferential treatment.

In 2002, Colorado lost similar arguments when the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled the state must serve kosher foods to Jewish prisoners at no charge. The court ruled Colorado had violated the prisoners' freedom-of-religion rights, an argument three Oklahoma inmates are making.

But while arguing the case Thursday for the Corrections Department, Doughty added a twist not considered in the Colorado case.

Serving kosher meals at taxpayers' expense would violate the U.S. Constitution, providing for the establishment of religion by government, Doughty said.

After Thursday's hearing, Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell said he would consider all the arguments before issuing a report and recommendation. The case will then go to a district judge, who could follow Purcell's recommended ruling, ask for more evidence or reject Purcell's recommendation.

Weeks or months could pass before Purcell issues a report, attorneys said.

The trio said they are forced to pay for kosher meals without any real assurance the food is kosher, which is defined as ritually fit by Jewish law. The men allege they are forced to eat just fruits and vegetables in most instances.

Rabbi Ovadia Goldman of the Chabad Jewish Center of Oklahoma City testified about the importance of eating kosher to those practicing Orthodox Judaism.

"Every law that God gave us is an opportunity and a chance to strengthen our relationship with him," Goldman said. "If there's a possibility to eat kosher food, then not eating kosher food weakens our relationship with God."

In a restrictive setting, the best way to ensure meals are properly prepared is to serve prepackaged kosher meals, he said.

Bobby Boone, deputy director of the Corrections Department's eastern region, said to provide such meals would cost Oklahoma's prison system about $3.8 million more annually.

Once kosher meals are served, then other religions will demand other special diets, Boone said under questioning from Oklahoma Assistant Attorney General Stefan Doughty.

Of the 96 religions represented in the state's prison population, 20 could claim to have special dietary needs, Boone estimated. That represents 6% of the inmate population.

The prison system now spends about $2.50 a day for each inmate to eat. Kosher meals would cost about $10 a day, Boone said.

He argued that providing kosher meals would force the Corrections Department to cut staff and would appear as though the agency were providing preferential treatment.

"We're not operating at full staff anywhere in the state of Oklahoma," Boone said. "It would increase the risk — inside and outside the prison."

In 2002, Colorado lost similar arguments when the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled the state must serve kosher foods to Jewish prisoners at no charge. The court ruled Colorado had violated the prisoners' freedom-of-religion rights.

After the July 8 hearing, U.S. Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell said he would consider all the arguments before issuing a report and recommendation.

Lexington, Oklahoma (www.koshertoday.com) Three prison inmates want the Oklahoma Department of Corrections to pay for their kosher meals. T he inmates say DOC is violating the First Amendment by not letting them practice their chosen religion. In federal court this week, DOC attorneys argued that serving the kosher meals would cost millions of dollars, might violate the First Amendment's establishment-of-religion clause and could even cause riots. The inmates are incarcerated at Joseph Harp Correctional Center near Lexington. Jon Andrew Cottriel, Jerry Harmon, and Dennis Earl Fulbright. They say they're forced to pay for kosher meals without knowing for sure if it's kosher.

Oklahoma Assistant Attorney General Stefan K. Doughty said he would file an objection to Purcell's ruling by the court-imposed Sept. 14 deadline.

The objection and the inmates' responses will be considered by U.S. District Judge Lee R. West. West could approve or reject Purcell's ruling, or ask for more evidence.

The kosher meals will be served only if West approves, said the inmates' attorney, Rand Eddy. If that happens, it will set the stage for all Orthodox Jews in state prisons to receive kosher meals, Eddy said.

Cost argument rejected

During a hearing last month, a corrections official testified that serving the kosher meals to everybody who would want them would cost more than $3 million a year and cause disruptions with inmates.

Purcell rejected the arguments.

"There is no persuasive evidence presented by (the state) that the cost of providing kosher meals to the plaintiffs and other Orthodox Jewish inmates would entail more than a minimal increase in the Oklahoma DOC's annual food budget," he wrote.

Purcell also noted that Oklahoma prisons already serve pork-free meals to those of the Muslim faith.

Doughty said his objections to Purcell's opinion will argue that providing kosher meals could violate others' rights.

Serving kosher meals at taxpayer expense would violate the U.S. Constitution by providing funding for the establishment of religion by the government, Doughty said.

_____________________________________________________________

Kosher diet

Orthodox Jews following strict interpretation of kosher laws:

Cannot eat pork.

Cannot mix meat and dairy foods, including cooking the items in the same pan, or using the same utensils.

May only eat beef from cattle that have been properly slaughtered and drained of blood.

OKLAHOMA CITY, Okla. (www.koshertoday.com) A federal magistrate ruled in late August that three Oklahoma inmates have a right to eat kosher food paid for by the state Department of Corrections. The ruling is consistent with similar opinions by other state and federal courts. Attorneys for the state say they plan to object to the ruling by U.S. District Magistrate Judge Gary Purcell. The judge ruled that the inmates right to freely express their Orthodox Jewish religion outweighs the concern over state expenses. The inmates, convicted sex offenders, filed their petition while incarcerated at Joseph Harp Correctional Center in Lexington, Okla. Until a U.S. district judge makes a final decision, no kosher meals will be served.

Some of the information on The Awareness Center's web pages may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Saturday, October 26, 1996

NEW YORK -- Does the Jewish community take rabbinic sexual misconduct seriously?

The answer depends on who's being questioned, but many leaders lean toward a no.

Officials of the major religious movements contend that when a
congregant complains of being sexually exploited or harassed by her or
his rabbi, the matter is handled cautiously but effectively.

Rabbi Joel Meyers

"We're dealing with [the] issues, and we will take seriously rabbis'
behaviors in all areas of their lives," says Rabbi Joel Meyers,
executive vice president of the Conservative movement's Rabbinical
Assembly.

But "we want to be very careful in coming to any kind of a judgment, to
first understand what the situation is before we jump to conclusions,"
he says.

On the other hand, many movement leaders say they believe more needs to
be done in response to rabbinic sexual impropriety, which some maintain
is much more common than the community acknowledges.

In the Reconstructionist and Reform movements, the issue has recently
received more attention. That is evidenced by the development of new
policies for handling the issue, and more attention paid to the matter
at professional gatherings and in rabbinic journals.

Yet others -- including clergy sex abuse experts, women who call
themselves victims of rabbinic sexual exploitation, members of
congregations where such conduct has allegedly occurred, and a few
rabbis working to change the way the issue is handled -- say Jewish
religious leaders' response generally remains ineffectual.

Rabbi Arthur Gross Schaefer

"If this area is ever to be taken as seriously as it needs to be, the
message must come from our leaders," says Arthur Gross Schaefer, an
attorney and the rabbi of Reform congregation Kehilat HaAlonim in Ojai.

Adds Gross Schaefer, who has for the past few years been pushing his
movement to better handle rabbinic sexual exploitation, "In the past,
that message has been less than clear."

Those involved in such cases say that until very recently the response
of many synagogues to those few women who complained of sexual
misconduct by their rabbis was to try to persuade the clergyman to leave
the congregation quietly, all the while hoping the real reason for his
departure did not leak out.

For their part, rabbinic professional organizations have often helped the rabbi in question secure another job.

Rabbi Debra Orenstein

Rabbi Julie Spitzer

"There's a desire to reshuffle people, to keep it quiet and move them to
a new community where they succumb to the same temptations," says Rabbi
Debra Orenstein, a Conservative rabbi who serves as a senior fellow at
the Wilstein Institute in Los Angeles.

Rabbi Julie Spitzer, director of the New York Federation of Reform
Synagogues, and the Union of American Hebrew Congregations' expert on
rabbinic sexual misconduct, tends to agree. "A lot of organizations want
to handle things quietly, in-house," she says.

The situation only began to change, she notes, "when the women who had been victims started to come forward."

But rarely do those women go beyond their congregations to their
movements' ethics committee to pursue disciplinary action. Few
congregants even know that that rabbinical organizations -- let alone
ethics committees -- exist, and the movements do little to help educate
their constituents about where they can turn in cases of rabbinic
misconduct, say those involved with the issue.

Awareness of clergy sexual abuse has grown in American society over the
past several years. That awareness seems to be making a slow but growing
impact on the way the matter is viewed by the Jewish community's grass
roots and its leaders.

The Board of Rabbis of Greater Philadelphia, for example, recently held a symposium on rabbinic sexual misconduct.

For its part, the Reconstructionist movement, the smallest mainstream
denomination in American Jewish life, has recently implemented a
stringent approach to the matter.

The Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association's ethics committee
formulated an initial policy in 1995, and refined it this year when its
members were confronted by a tough case involving one of the movement's
rabbis who molested young boys years ago.

The RRA expelled the rabbi earlier this year, becoming the first
rabbinical organization to expel a member for sexual misconduct.

Rabbi Leila Gal
Berner

Under its new policy, the group notified all the movement's
congregations and the other movements to ensure that a rabbi who has a
serious problem involving sexual misconduct does not work as a religious
leader again.

"It is necessary not to endanger anyone else," says Rabbi Leila Gal
Berner, chairwoman of the association's ethics committee and the
spiritual leader of Bet Haverim in Atlanta.

Rabbi Steven Dworkin

In contrast to the RRA's action, the centrist Orthodox rabbinical
organization has not disciplined one of its members for sexual
misconduct in years, if ever, says Rabbi Steven Dworken, executive vice
president of the Orthodox Rabbinical Council of America.

"I really don't think it goes on in Orthodox circles the way it does in
others," he says. "I don't think that in any way, shape or form it's a
problem in our ranks."

Yet the recent experiences of several Orthodox individuals have led them to disagree with Dworken's assessment.

Three years ago, two women who had studied closely with a prominent
Orthodox rabbi in a large Northwestern city claimed he had courted them
and had sex with them several years earlier. One of the women had
studied with the rabbi in order to convert to Judaism, and the other to
become observant.

"My soul had been raped," says one of the women, who asked that her name not be used.

"The community got rid of the rabbi and hushed up what it was about,"
says another Orthodox rabbi in the same city who is familiar with the
case.

The accused rabbi, a member of the Rabbinical Council of America and the
married father of four, agreed to step down from his pulpit but wanted
to remain in the community. One of his victims threatened to go public
if he stayed in the city so he relocated to an ultrareligious community
on the East Coast.

The synagogue board paid out his contract, and the rabbi left with more
than $30,000, one of his victims and the other rabbi say in interviews.

At no point did either of the women who came forward approach the RCA
with charges. But they did appeal to some leading Orthodox authorities
for guidance about taking the rabbi to a beit din, or religious court, says the woman who was interviewed.

"They said that halachically they don't recognize clergy [sexual] abuse," she says, referring to Jewish law.

"Ironically, despite all of the authority that the religion heaps on the
rabbi, they halachically insist that he's just another adulterer and we
were of consensual age," she adds.

Rabi Gedalia Dov Schwartz

According to Rabbi Gedalia Dov Schwartz, a leading Orthodox halachic
authority, Jewish law's view of a rabbi's sexual exploitation of a
congregant "would be no different than anyone else" having an adulterous
affair.

The Orthodox rabbi in question did not respond to requests for an interview.

In the meantime, the Conservative movement also is finding sexual issues among its congregants.

Rabbinic misconduct is rarely brought to the attention of the Rabbinical
Assembly, however. And even when it is, no formal procedure is in place
to handle the matter. Nor is there a written ethics code.

"In today's environment a report means someone is guilty. We have tried
to maintain very carefully the fact that someone is innocent until
proven otherwise," says Meyers, who investigates most complaints to the
Rabbinical Assembly himself and tries to resolve them.

Rabbi Milton Feierstein

Rabbi Milton Feierstein, immediate past chairman of the Va'ad Hakavod,
the R.A.'s ethics committee, says the Conservative rabbinate is
developing "a code of appropriate rabbinic practice that would cover
things like the rabbi in relationship to his congregation and to other
rabbis."

But "we've been at the talking stage for almost two years," he notes.

Rabbi Nina Beth Cardin

Rabbi Nina Beth Cardin, a member of the R.A.'s executive council, says
she once approached Meyers to tell him about a report of a rabbi's
sexual exploitation of a congregant.

Meyers "said there was essentially nothing we can do. He said to tell the victim to get a lawyer," says Cardin.

Meyers does not remember that case but acknowledges that "maybe I said it and r

Since he assumed his job at the R.A. in 1989, four cases of sexual
misconduct have come to his attention, says Meyers. Two of the four
cases turned out "not to be true," he says. One involved a false
accusation.

In a fourth case, which involved a rabbi using "inappropriate behavior
but nothing physical," the R.A. required the rabbi to take specific
steps toward repentance, including acknowledging his wrongdoing to his
victim and to his congregation as well as consulting with a rabbinic
mentor, Meyers says.
In the Reform movement, the Central Conference of American Rabbis
recently has been working actively to address the issue. CCAR leaders
agree with critics that the organization needs to improve the way
rabbinic sexual misconduct is handled.

Rabbi Jeffrey Stiffman

"We're in the process of refining what we do," says Rabbi Jeffrey
Stiffman, past chair of the CCAR's ethics committee. "There are a lot of
new findings and [increased] willingness to face the problem."
But change is coming slowly, according to some Reform congregants and
rabbis who charge that the system too often protects offenders and
punishes victims.

In the mid-1980s the CCAR convened a task force -- jokingly called "the
well-oiled zipper committee," according to several sources -- to look at
the matter.

After meeting for about two years, committee participants, including the
CCAR's senior leaders, decided that discussions and papers about sexual
misconduct would be promoted at CCAR conventions and in the
organization's journal.

A decade later, some Reform rabbis and congregants are angry that the issue still hasn't moved beyond that.

"When it's time for the CCAR to take action about an ethical issue like
grapes being picked by migrant workers, they come up with a policy
immediately," says one Reform rabbi who has been agitating within the
organization to see the issue addressed in a concrete way. "But when it
comes to monitoring and peer supervision, we can't act."

There's "such fear" of taking a stand against a colleague, says the
rabbi, who asked that her name not be used because, she says, she has
already been marginalized by her peers for speaking out on the issue
within the CCAR.

To give the Reform movement its due, it did formulate a sexual harassment policy, which was adopted in October 1995.

Intended to help congregations draft their own sexual misconduct
guidelines, a copy was sent to each Reform congregation's president, and
was written up in the movement's magazine for congregants, Reform
Judaism.

But, the UAHC's Spitzer says, the guidelines' impact has been limited.
"There are lots of guidelines but a lot of confusion and denial on the
part of congregations."

Currently, when a victim formally complains to the CCAR's ethics
committee, the charge is investigated through a process that has, in
some cases, taken years. The committee then makes recommendations to the
CCAR's executive committee, which decides on appropriate discipline.

Until now, the resolution of recent cases of sexual misconduct involving
Reform rabbis has varied widely -- from a slap on the wrist to
temporary suspension.

In the four years that Stiffman chaired the ethics committee, a position
that ended this year, the CCAR temporarily suspended between five and
eight rabbis for periods of one to 10 years for sexual misconduct, he
says.

The CCAR established a new ethics review committee this March to assess
and possibly overhaul the way allegations of rabbinic sexual misconduct
and abuse are handled.

Rabbi Jack Stern

"We have to develop a mode of investigation that may not yet be in
place," says Rabbi Jack Stern, a highly esteemed veteran member of the
Reform clergy who is serving as chair of the new committee.

He expects the task force to report to the CCAR at its annual convention next spring.

One of the system's most serious flaws, critics charge, is that none of
the movements' rabbinical organizations consistently specifies what must
take place to illustrate sincere repentance in order for a suspension
to be lifted or an expulsion revoked.

That makes it unclear to the perpetrator, his victims and even those
movement leaders responsible for discipline whether or not the rabbi has
gone through that process, say both critics of the system and those
involved in changing the process.

"There is a lot of leaning toward giving the offending clergy the
opportunity to repent, and sometimes [giving] premature placement back
in congregational or other settings," says Spitzer.

According to Stern of the CCAR's oversight committee, "We have to deal with the area of tshuvah.
[repentance]. We haven't begun yet. All we know are the areas that we
should be discussing and making recommendations, but nothing is
foregone."

Maimonides

Rabbi Joseph Soloveichik

The great sages of Jewish tradition, from Maimonides to Joseph
Soloveichik, have elucidated elements common to all acts of repentance,
according to Reform Rabbi Arthur Gross Schaefer, who has written about
sexual misconduct and repentance for the CCAR Journal: Reform Jewish
Quarterly.

Repentance for sexual misconduct must include self-examination,
acknowledgment of wrongdoing, an appeal to the victims for forgiveness,
and some restitution for damages caused, he writes in the article.

"Tshuvah is not achieved simply by an offending rabbi saying that he/she
is sorry, seeing a therapist or being placed on suspension for a period
of time," he writes.

Then Gross Schaefer adds in an interview, "When we deal with the
difficult issues of rabbinic sexual misconduct, we have not taken
seriously our own tradition.

"Until we are willing to take tshuvah seriously, we are doing a major
disservice to our victims, to our congregations and to our colleagues."

Subscribe to The Awareness Center's Newsletter

Translate

Survivors ARE Heroes!

The Awareness Center believes ALL survivors of sex crimes should be given yellow ribbons to wear proudly.

Survivors of sexual violence (as adults and/or as a child) are just as deserving of a yellow ribbon as the men and women of our armed forces, who have been held captive as hostages or prisoners of war.

Survivors of sexual violence have been forced to learn how to survive, being held captive not by foreigners, but mostly by their own family members, teachers, camp counselors, coaches babysitters, rabbis, cantors or other trusted authority figures.

For these reasons ALL survivors of sexual violence should be seen as heroes!